Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33646506›Full record

ReviewCurrent osteoporosis reports2021

Osteogenesis Imperfecta-Who Needs Rodding Surgery?

François R Fassier

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current osteoporosis reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Evaluation of Radiolucent Lesions in Cortices of Long Bones in Osteogenesis Imperfecta Patients.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. [Osteogenesis imperfecta : A multidisciplinary challenge].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2022
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

François R FassierShriners Hospitals for Children® - Canada, 1003 Décarie Boulevard, Office 6.56, Montréal, Québec, H4A 0A9, Canada. ffassier@shrinenet.org.
Shriners Hospitals for Children - Canada · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe purpose of this review is to precise the indications for intramedullary rodding of long bones in osteogenesis imperfecta, the classic treatment for fractures and deformities in this condition. RECENT

findingsThe use of plates and screws alone is not recommended, but its use in conjunction with rodding is becoming more popular as demonstrated in recent literature. The different types of rods are reviewed and their advantages/disadvantages exposed. There is a clear advantage for telescopic rods in terms of incidence of revision surgery but complications are still to be expected. An interdisciplinary approach combining a medical treatment with a surgical correction of deformities as well as a rehabilitation program is the key for success in the treatment of osteogenesis imperfecta children.

Indexed as

BracesChildChild, PreschoolDiphosphonatesFracture Fixation, IntramedullaryFractures, BoneHumansInfantInternal FixatorsOsteogenesis ImperfectaReoperationDiphosphonatesFemurHumerusOsteogenesis imperfectaRodding surgeryTelescopic nailTibia

Identifiers

PMID33646506
OpenAlexW3135397008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.